November 3, 2011

The White House immediately slammed the vote, saying it has "cooperated extensively with the committee's investigation by producing over 85,000 pages of documents, including 20,000 pages produced just yesterday afternoon."

"And all of the materials that have been disclosed affirm what we said on Day One: this was a merit based decision made by the Department of Energy," White House spokesman Eric Schultz said....

If all the materials you've chosen to disclose affirm the story you want to tell and the story is difficult to believe, isn't that a reason to look for more evidence? Who cares how many sheets of paper were produced so far? And if everything relevant has already been produced, why the sensitivity about the subpoena?

Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., who chairs the energy panel's investigations subcommittee, said the White House has been "stonewalling" on Solyndra, releasing some documents but not all.

"They feel that the inner circle of the West Wing is off bounds and we have no right to ask this information," Stearns told Fox Business News this week. "I think the American taxpayers deserve an answer."

"I mean, we're just talking about what happened on Solyndra. It's nothing to do with national security," Stearns added. "We're asking where the taxpayers' money went. And frankly, we're just trying to understand, did the White House actually push this (loan) out, knowing that it was going to fail?""

If the inner circle of the West Wing is off bounds, the White House will refuse to comply with the subpoena, but the subpoena forces the White House to take that stand, conspicuously, which will have a political effect of some kind.

68 comments:

Deny, deny, deny, stonewall, obstruct, then deny some more. Sounds like they came within a pube's width of going the GM route with this boondoggle. I'm glad they didn't, but it never should have gotten this far.

If/when the communications become public, the optics, well, not so good.

Nearly a billion dollars went down this rat-hole. That's the lifetime earnings of 600 people.

That's like sentencing these 600 people to a lifetime of forced labor.

These 600 people will leave their family every morning to go to a job where they trade seconds of their lives in return for pennies; and these assholes just flushed billions of these pennies, these seconds of people's lives, down a toilet.

What exactly qualifies as a "real problem", Carol? The fact that TBS no longer shows Matlock re-runs?

Having done a lot of work on document production for litigation, 100,000 pages is nothing. I've seen individual Excel files that print out longer. There is more. Check the text messages, the blackberry pin-to-pins, the personal email accounts. That's where they'll find the good stuff.

The democrats owe Nixon an apology. At least Nixon had a legitimate excuse, there were communists in the democratic party in 72 as later revealed in KGB documents. Solyndra and the other green scandals, just old fashion payola to campaign contributors, you know, bribes. And unlike Fast and Furious, no one died in the Watergate Affair. Soon without a doubt the Corzine scandal will have an Obama Administration connection. This Administration will turn out to be one of the crookedest ones in the last hundred years. The next Administration if nothing else will create quite a lot of special prosecution jobs just going through the Obama disaster. And the prison industry will get a boost from all of the new inmates. Will there be a special wing built for Holder at a Federal Super Max? I certainly hope so, more infrastructure spending is needed.

Carol if you are too foolish to believe that corruption at this level and extent isn't a problem for Congress to look in to then you are beyond help.

This used to be the Norma Desmond administration - "Obama IS big! It's the PRESIDENCY that has gotten small!" Now it's the Bart Simpson administration - "I didn't do it, nobody saw me do it, you can't prove a thing."

I'm waiting for it to become the Captain Queeg administration any time now.

On the one hand, I just can't get excited about Solyndra. So far, it seems fairly straight forward - the loan guarantee seems to have been pushed through too fast for political reasons, but not the usual ones of paying of contributors, but rather, to help the President shape his message.

But, on the other hand, this is probably the tip of the iceberg. Billions more of green energy loan guarantees were made at the last minute a bit over a month ago, and a suspicious number of those guarantees went to people who were close to the Democratic leadership and/or the President. And, I am sure that Nancy Pelosi doesn't think it any worse that her brother's company got a guarantee bigger than Solyndra's when she thinks it just fine that so many of the ObamaCare waivers were for businesses in her district. But, for the rest of us, it does appear to stink a bit.

"Is there anything more difficult than figuring out how taxpayer money is spent..."

From the accounts I've read, this one wasn't a hard call. It's why the suspicions are so high it was a "payoff" to a big donor. But even if it wasn't, the Administration's judgement was appalling bad. Can't imagine why people don't trust them to spend any new monies wisely.

What is a bit humorous is that President Obama claimed that he was going to run the most transparent, open, and honest Administration in memory. And, yet, example by example, this is turning out to be another Big Lie.

So, no surprise that the Holder DoJ has announced that it will now refuse to acknowledge the existence of records that it doesn't want to produce in response to FOIA requests. In the past, the Department would say that there were records that it could not produce for specified legal reasons. Now, they will just pretend like they don't exist.

Just in time to prevent disclosure of the shadow reapportionment plans that its voting rights people are supposedly (illegally) using to approve state reapportionment plans. Last time around, it turned out that these plans were designed to provide Max Black districts, and there is evidence that, surprise, surprise, the DoJ is doing the same thing again, despite multiple judgment against it last time.

Of course, if you are talking the DoJ and corruption, you shouldn't forget the various gun walking programs that they ran, until Fast and Furious blew up, and how the department is stonewalling like crazy, as knowledge and culpability keep moving up through the department.

I have said for a long time that this Administration will turn out to have been the most corrupt of our life times. And, it seems to be on track for that.

There is a balance between spurious fishing expeditions and actual worthwhile subpoenas. I don't think a reasonable person would look at what's been reported on this in the press and think that it doesn't bear further investigation.

There is a balance between spurious fishing expeditions and actual worthwhile subpoenas. I don't think a reasonable person would look at what's been reported on this in the press and think that it doesn't bear further investigation.

Rather than printing off all those pages, why not ship it to them on an iPad?

Did you know that if a pilot takes an iPad on a plane, it can replace 50 pounds of paper -- all the manuals and documents that are required before flying? Similarly, the weather on an iPad can be much more up-to-date than the sheets torn off in the airport operations center, and carried to the gate and used 2 or 4 hours later.

The sheet that tells them why so much money was given out to firms that didn't have a prayer of succeeding.

I think then that the real question is whether the Dems in general and the Administration in particular, were just stupid, or were corrupt. Or, more likely, some combination of both.

As I have pointed out before, I think that Nancy Pelosi actually believes, with her entire soul, Keynesian economics, and that when applying it, it doesn't matter how the money is spent, as long as it is spent (and, so, you might as well spend it on your friends, relatives, and political backers). She doesn't sound any different today than she did when she was pushing Stimulus I through the House. Still making up fiscal multipliers, etc.

So, we have a President who likely didn't take any economics classes in college (and we aren't likely to know either way, given their lack of transparency about his transcripts). He never worked for a private company. He was a community organizer and then a politician. But worse, a Chicago politician, where payoffs are just part of the way that politics works there.

He also has shown himself to not be a good manager. Not surprising, since he had no training and no experience before taking the Oval Office. His old-boys network managed to quiet, then run off Christine Romer.

So, did he really understand that the government cannot effectively pick winners and losers? That trying to do so had a significant fiscal and financial cost? Probably not, given who he spent his time with before being elected President.

I don't really think that President Obama is stupid, or, indeed, the stupidest President that we have seen in our lifetimes. Surely, not near the smartest, but not the stupidest either. But, what he seems to be is the most ignorant and naive, when it comes to understanding how the world, and, in particular here, economics, works (he doesn't do much better with foreign policy).

So, in the end, I think the question that these subpoenas may help answer, is whether the problem was just that President Obama was too ignorant and naive to be President, or did his background in corrupt Chicago politics help make things worse.

Did you know that if a pilot takes an iPad on a plane, it can replace 50 pounds of paper -- all the manuals and documents that are required before flying? Similarly, the weather on an iPad can be much more up-to-date than the sheets torn off in the airport operations center, and carried to the gate and used 2 or 4 hours later.

Except that presumably he would have to turn off the iPad from the time he was pushed back from the gate to the time that his plane was at 10,000 feet, and ditto on the approach. Unless, of course, the iPad was enabled for transmission, and then it would have to stay off for the entire flight. FAA rules, remember? Or, do they just apply to the rest of us?

I have long been suspicious of the FAA rules about what and when electronic devices can be active during airline flights.

Except that presumably he would have to turn off the iPad from the time he was pushed back from the gate to the time that his plane was at 10,000 feet, and ditto on the approach.

That was mentioned, and of course the pilots do this (wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more). Secure stowage was mentioned -- they don't want it flying around the cockpit during takeoff/landing, and I'm just thinking: Velcro!

@ BRUCE H: Please consider the 'heredity/enviroment' question when analyzing BO's stupidity/ignorance. For stupidity consider the 'success' of his biological parents as humans. For ignorance consider his 'education' from private school kindergarten to Harvard.

Bruce Hayden said..."- the loan guarantee seems to have been pushed through too fast for political reasons, but not the usual ones of paying of contributors"

George Kaiser, an Oklahoma billionaire businessman, is a key private investor in Solyndra. He was one of Obama's most active "bundlers" in 2008, raking in tens of thousands of dollars from various donors (including Solyndra's executives and board members) and passing them on to the Obama election campaign. He visited the White House many times in the lead up to the Solyndra loan guarantee approval. Solyndra was not only a tool for the administration to push Obama's green energy message, it was most definitely a payoff to donors.

I believe this to be true, but I think the Repubs are making a mistake to focus on this. I think, instead, they should be making Solyndra a poster child for the inappropriatness of government using taxpayer dollars to pick winners and losers. This pracice has to stop, whatever the motivation.

"MadisonMan said...I'm surprised you didn't bring up "Walker's Job session" multiple times...you know like you did in a "Sex Education" thread.

Sex Ed Legislation is passed during a special jobs session ... and jobs aren't relevant.

Ho-kay."

The thread wasn't on whether it was appropriate to pass non job related legislation in a job session. It was about whether the sex education that was passed was good or bad. You made no comment on topic. Zero:

"I think it's a great Jobs Bill! Thanks Republicans. This Special Jobs session is oh-so-worthwhile!"

"Then why did the Governor call a special jobs session of the Legislature?"

"Shouting, perhaps you can explain this link to me. The Republican Governor called a special jobs session of the Legislature. Why?"

"MadisonMan said...Or, shouting, how about this puff piece?

Does the bill on teaching abstinence in Schools create a job? Does it improve the business climate? After all, that's why this Republican Governor called this special Legislative Session to order.

It's all about jobs baby!!"

"Shouting, per you 9:40 comment, perhaps you can explain this current Legislative session to me. They're talking about sex ed in a jobs session, not about reducing regulations. Or cutting taxes.

Is Gov. Walker really a Republican?"

"MadisonMan said...Hey, maybe you're on to something. Wisconsin's Beer Tax is the lowest in the nation. Raise the beer tax, driving down beer sales, and maybe unwanted pregnancies will drop as well!"

@ BRUCE H: Please consider the 'heredity/enviroment' question when analyzing BO's stupidity/ignorance. For stupidity consider the 'success' of his biological parents as humans. For ignorance consider his 'education' from private school kindergarten to Harvard.

Let me respond by pointing out that he has done nothing to show that he is more than a bit smarter than average. Surely, no indication that he is in the Nixon/Clinton level of brightness, or even, probably Carter. We don't have his SATs, LSATs, etc., nor do we have any of his grades.

Attending those schools is a red herring here, since it is highly likely that he was an affirmative action admit.

As far as ignorance goes, he has shown scant knowledge of how our economy actually works. Maybe he was diverted through excessive respect for his absent Marxist father. Nevertheless, we don't have any reason to believe that he took any economics or business classes in college, since, of course, we have never seen his transcripts. What we do know, is that since then, he didn't do anything that would expand his actual knowledge in these areas until elected President (and I don't consider listening to Bill Ayers or the Rev. Wright as useful here).

You seem to be arguing that his parents had good academic credentials, so he must be bright, and he graduated from elite schools, so he cannot be ignorant. I respectfully disagree with both of these.

I doubt it can, but if it's on, what then? Look at it from an enforcement point of view. You have to assume that not everyone is going to remember, or care, to turn their wifi off. Easier and safer to require everyone to tell everyone to turn all items off.

I think, instead, they should be making Solyndra a poster child for the inappropriatness of government using taxpayer dollars to pick winners and losers. This pracice has to stop, whatever the motivation.

Yes. We’re beating a dead horse talking about corruption (b/c our side knows, their's doesn't believe or care) but I think people will listen when you talk about having to increase taxes, increase debt or decrease services to pay for this crap. Those are the choice the administration made when they decided to write this check, and they didn’t even do basic due diligence. They were wasteful with our money. People will respond to that message, and I don’t think we should muddy it.

Bruce Hayden said..."- the loan guarantee seems to have been pushed through too fast for political reasons, but not the usual ones of paying of contributors"

My point here is not that the standard political payoff politics didn't have anything to do with Solyndra, but rather, that this loan was esp. egregious because the loan was rushed through in the face of many questions in order to use it as a political backdrop by the President. There is evidence that at one late point, it was felt that even the Sec. of Energy couldn't kill approving the loan, as an event had already been scheduled for the President at Solyndra announcing the loan and all the jobs the loan guarantee would miraculously create (or maybe just save or support).

That was my point - that final approval was apparently rushed through, on the basis of an already scheduled Presidential event to announce the loan guarantee.

But isn't that really worse - that a loan guarantee for a half a billion dollars would be rushed through, despite numerous red flags, so as not to possibly embarrass the President by forcing him to change his schedule?

Those are the choice the administration made when they decided to write this check, and they didn’t even do basic due diligence. They were wasteful with our money.

Actually, due diligence apparently was done. Solyndra had a bad business plan, and couldn't, in the foreseeable future, unless there were drastic changes to the environment, make money or pay off the loan.

The problem was that all the red flags and negative evaluations were ignored.

Back to my suggestion of naiveté and ignorance. It was almost like the Obama Administration believed that they could overrule economic laws and business reality by throwing federal money at the company. It didn't matter that the loan evaluations showed it to be a losing venture. The Obamaites were just that much smarter than the people evaluating the loan guarantee.

Carol Herman said, "The old trick of televised hearings have lost their ability to attract the mob.

Joseph McCarthy, the junior senator from Wisconsin, is also still dead.

And, the "House "unamerican activities" unit also bit the dust."

Just because Joseph McCarthy was a drunk, a bully, and a liar doesn't mean the USA wasn't infested with an astonishing number of Soviet spies.

And it surely doesn't mean that the House has no business investigating how $500,000,000.00 in federal funds got poured into a politically favored business.

It surely is an irony that the Left has gotten so much mileage out of ol' tailgunner Joe. Whenever they don't want you to look too closely at some malfeasabnce, the shouts of "McCarthy!" invariably go up.

The difference between witch-hunting and looking for government malfeasance is, there were no witches but there surely is plenty of government malfeasance.

I doubt it can, but if it's on, what then? Look at it from an enforcement point of view. You have to assume that not everyone is going to remember, or care, to turn their wifi off. Easier and safer to require everyone to tell everyone to turn all items off.

Except for the pilot and his iPad.

WiFi has never really been the issue. Originally, it was cell phones, and the real justification for that comes from the cellular providers, whose cell towers couldn't switch off the calls from a plane in flight fast enough. That wasn't what they told you, but that is the reality.

Turning everything else off (except, apparently, for the pilot's iPad) is based on the theory that electronic devices could potentially interfere with electronic devices and controls on the planes. Now, the electronic devices that are required to be turned off don't operate at the same frequencies, and the controls, etc. are supposed to be adequately shielded. But, apparently on some older planes, that may be questionable.

Electrical engineers have been laughing at this for years. But the FAA, bolstered by some anecdotal evidence, hasn't backed down. Better to be safe than sorry, regardless of how silly the government looks.

WiFi has never been an issue either. Airlines are now offering it to their passengers, and it has such a low range that it won't have the problems that cell towers have with phones on moving planes.

The requirement to turn off electronics during take-off & landing has very little (perhaps nothing) to do with whether they are transmitting a signal. It's about trying to minimize distractions among passengers during the most potentially dangerous parts of the flight. If you need to evacuate quickly, taking the time to close up your laptop is not only going to result in injuries to you, but anyone else whose exit path you're blocking. Not hearing emergency instructions because you're rocking out on your iPod is going to be equally problematic. Finding a place to stow your Kindle before it flies out of your grip and brains a stewardess is not going to be high on your priority list while your plane is tumbling through the air.

They don't explain that to you, because it involves conjuring up entirely too real mental pictures for a large group of people, some of whom may be in a bit of a fragile mental state as it is. It's comparably stupid that you're allowed to read a 15lb book during takeoff, but I think in this the airlines have realized there's a limit to what they can get away with. The 'transmitting a signal' is a red herring that lets them mitigate a decent amount of risk. If they could come up with a believable reason to get you to restrain all objects of any size and leave them alone the entire flight, they certainly would try it.

MadisonMan said...Curious, my point -- perhaps too elliptically made for you -- was: Why is the Legislation even considering the bill during a so-called Jobs Session?"

I understand your point. You've posted it multiple times in multiple threads that have nothing to do with your point...which is my point. I'll add that you've brought up Walker...the governor can suggest a legislative agenda but cannot dictate it. So there you fail. Walker wants a focus on jobs, the legislature has other ideas. By the way, the fact that they are passing "non-job" related bills doesn't mean that they are not in discussion about job related bills, they are.

"State-level Republicans in WI love to tell local school districts what to do, despite any jawboning they do about local control. They are just like Democrats in that respect." Really? The sex-ed legislation certainly isn't an example, as they have simply provided an additional choice for school districts to have.

There is a balance between spurious fishing expeditions and actual worthwhile subpoenas. I don't think a reasonable person would look at what's been reported on this in the press and think that it doesn't bear further investigation.

It will be considered 'National Security' cause all the inner circle of the White House are so precious and do so much to stop the bad guys from hurting us. To cause them to resign or trial or have a fit will endanger us all!